DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 -11 and 13 - 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1 – 11, 13 and 17 - 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (CN 107002857) in view of Williams et al. (U.S. Patent # 6004039).
Regarding Claim 1, Kumagai discloses a rotary seal assembly (figs 1 and 2) comprising: a first machine part in the form of a shaft (30); a second machine part which engages around the shaft ( 20 around 30), wherein the first machine part and the second machine part are spaced apart from one another with the formation of a sealing gap (gap between 30 and 20) and are arranged rotatably relative to one another about an axis of rotation (30 rotates relative to 20); a seal-holding structure (groove of 20) which is formed on one of the two machine parts (groove formed in 20); a rotary seal (60) with a foot portion (as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below) and with a sealing lip (63), which are connected to one another via a connecting portion (as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below), wherein the foot portion is arranged on or in the seal-holding structure (as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below) and wherein the sealing lip bears in a sealing manner against a sealing surface of the respective other machine part (63 against 30), in order to seal off an oil side from an outer side of the rotary seal assembly (63 seals from the right side to the left side); and a foam ring (73) arranged on the oil side (73 on the right side of fig 2) and with a base body (71) and with a holding portion (77), wherein the foam ring engages around the first machine part (73 around 30) and is arranged so as to be held on the foot portion of the rotary seal via the holding portion (73 holds on the foot portion 61 via holding portion 77), the foam ring defining a central axis aligned about the shaft (73 with a central axis about shaft 30);
wherein the base body of the ring, in the mounted state, bears against the sealing surface in the circumferential direction at least in portions (71 bears against sealing surface of 30).
Kumagai does not disclose that when seen in a circumferential direction of the foam ring taken along the central axis, the foam ring has, at least in its unloaded, unmounted state, a corrugated inner circumferential side and/or a corrugated outer circumferential side, the corrugations protruding in a radial direction and extending in a direction parallel to the central axis.
However, Williams teaches that, when seen in a circumferential direction of the foam ring taken along the central axis, the ring (130, fig 5) has, at least in its unloaded, unmounted state, a corrugated inner circumferential side and/or a corrugated outer circumferential side (corrugated inner circumferential side of 130, fig 152), the corrugations protruding in a radial direction (165 in a radial direction, fig 5) and extending in a direction parallel to the central axis (165 parallel to axis of 130, fig 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the inner and outer circumferential surfaces of Kumagai with those of Williams with a reasonable expectation of success so that the corrugations facilitate radial expansion without resort to any bulk compression or tensile stretching of the seal wall (Williams Para 0042).
The combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the foam ring (Williams 130, fig 5) has, at least in its unloaded, unmounted state, a corrugated inner circumferential side and/or a corrugated outer circumferential side (corrugated inner circumferential side of 130, fig 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
819
861
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the holding portion extends laterally away from the base body (Kumagai 77 laterally away from 71).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the holding portion is embodied to be in multiple parts or annularly closed in the circumferential direction (Kumagai - annular shape of 77).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the holding portion is embodied to be in multiple parts or annularly closed in the circumferential direction (Kumagai - annular shape of 77).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the foam ring is held in a clamped manner via the holding portion on the rotary seal (Kumagai 73 clamped via 77).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the holding portion of the foam ring and/or the foot portion of the rotary seal is/are embodied in a corrugated manner (Williams 130, fig 5).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein the foam ring and the foot portion of the rotary seal are in mutual threaded engagement (Kumagai 73 engaged within the foot portion 61 and are in mutual threaded engagement, Definition of “threaded” from Cambridge dictionary is as follows:
THREADED | English meaning - Cambridge Dictionary
to put something long and thin such as string or thread through a narrow hole or into a small space).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the holding portion and/or the base body of the form ring is/are supported on the foot portion of the rotary seal in an axial direction with respect to the axis of rotation (Kumagai - 77 and 712 on the foot portion 61 in an axial direction).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the holding portion of the form ring extends up to the connecting portion of the rotary seal ( as seen in examiner annotated Kumagai fig 2 below).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the rotary seal and/or the foam ring as/are provided with a reinforcement layer which has an L-shaped cross-sectional shape (Kumagai - foam ring 73 is provided with a reinforcement layer 78, and reinforcement layer 78 has a L-shaped cross-sectional shape).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the base body of the foam ring has a cross-sectional shape which is rectangular or tapers in the direction of the sealing surface (Kumagai - 71 tapers in the direction of the sealing surface of 30).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the base body is formed at least partially from a closed-celled, an open-celled or a mixed closed-celled/open-celled foam (Kumagai 73 made of porous material made of foaming material).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the foam ring bears directly against the machine part which has the seal-holding structure (Kumagai 73 against the groove of 20).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the base body is formed projecting in a radial direction at least from the foot portion up to the sealing surface (Kumagai 71 radially from the foot portion up to the sealing surface of 30).
Regarding Claim 19, Kumagai discloses a rotary seal assembly (figs 1 and 2) comprising : a first machine part in the form of a shaft (30); a second machine part (housing 20) which engages around the shaft (30), wherein the first machine part and the second machine part are spaced apart from one another with the formation of a sealing gap (gap between housing 20 and 30) and are arranged rotatably relative to one another about an axis of rotation (110 rotates about its axis); a seal-holding structure (groove of housing 20) which is formed on one of the two machine parts (housing 20); a rotary seal with a foot portion and with a sealing lip ( as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below), which are connected to one another via a connecting portion ( as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below), wherein the foot portion is arranged on or in the seal-holding structure (foot portion in the groove of housing) and wherein the sealing lip bears in a sealing manner against a sealing surface of the respective other machine part (lip 63 against surface of 30), in order to seal off an oil side (right side of fig 2) from an outer side (left side of fig 2) of the rotary seal assembly (fig 2); a foam ring (73) arranged on the oil side (right side of fig 2) and with a base body ( as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below) and with a holding portion ( as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below), wherein the foam ring engages around the first machine part (73 around 30) and is arranged so as to be held on the foot portion of the rotary seal via the holding portion ( 73 holding on the foot portion 61 of seal via the holding portion 77 as seen in examiner annotated fig 2 below); wherein the foam ring and the rotary seal are in direct contact with each other and directly connected to each other (73 and 60 directly connected to each other),
wherein the base body of the ring, in the mounted state, bears against the sealing surface in the circumferential direction at least in portions (71 bears against sealing surface of 30).
Kumagai does not disclose that when seen in a circumferential direction of the foam ring taken along the central axis, the foam ring has, at least in its unloaded, unmounted state, a corrugated inner circumferential side and/or a corrugated outer circumferential side, the corrugations protruding in a radial direction and extending in a direction parallel to the central axis.
However, Williams teaches that, when seen in a circumferential direction of the foam ring taken along the central axis, the ring (130, fig 5) has, at least in its unloaded, unmounted state, a corrugated inner circumferential side and/or a corrugated outer circumferential side (corrugated inner circumferential side of 130, fig 152), the corrugations protruding in a radial direction (165 in a radial direction, fig 5) and extending in a direction parallel to the central axis (165 parallel to axis of 130, fig 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the inner and outer circumferential surfaces of Kumagai with those of Williams with a reasonable expectation of success so that the corrugations facilitate radial expansion without resort to any bulk compression or tensile stretching of the seal wall (Williams Para 0042).
The combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the foam ring (Williams 130, fig 5) has, at least in its unloaded, unmounted state, a corrugated inner circumferential side and/or a corrugated outer circumferential side (corrugated inner circumferential side of 130, fig 5).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the sealing lip axially extends towards the base body and is separated from the base body by an axial distance A (Kumagai 63 extends axially towards 71 and is separated from 71 by an axial distance).
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the sealing lip axially extends towards the base body and is separated from the base body by an axial distance (Kumagai 63 extends axially towards 71 and is separated from 71 by an axial distance).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai in view of Williams and in further view of Nakamura (U.S. PG Pub # 20020180159).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly.
Kumagai does not disclose wherein the foam ring has in the circumferential direction at least one radial channel which extends from the inner circumferential side up to the outer circumferential side of the foam ring.
However, Nakamura teaches wherein the foam ring (313a, fig 17) has in the circumferential direction at least one radial channel (313f, fig 17) which extends from the inner circumferential side up to the outer circumferential side of the foam ring (313f from inner to outer side of 313a, fig 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the foam ring of Kumagai to have a radial channel of Nakamura with a reasonable expectation of success so that the radial passage exhausts the gases (Nakamura Para 0091).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai in view of Williams and in further view of D’Alterio (U.S. Patent # 4765632).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly, wherein the rotary seal is pressure-activated (36 is pressure-activated).
Kumagai does not disclose wherein the foam ring is provided with an axial through-recess or with several axial through-recesses.
However, D’Alterio teaches wherein the foam ring (38, fig 6) is provided with an axial through-recess (51, fig 6) or with several axial through-recesses.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the foam ring of Kumagai to have an axial through-recess of D’Alterio with a reasonable expectation of success so that the recess acts as a sump for the unwanted debris (D'Alterio Col 4 Lines 19 – 21).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai in view of Williams and in further view of Downes et al. (U.S. PG Pub # 20030019692).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Kumagai and Williams discloses the rotary seal assembly.
Kumagai does not disclose wherein the rotary seal has a dust lip which points towards the outer side and/or bears in a pretensioned, sealed manner against the sealing surface by means of a pretensioning element.
However, Downes teaches wherein the rotary seal has a dust lip (22, fig 2) which points towards the outer side and/or bears in a pretensioned, sealed manner against the sealing surface by means of a pretensioning element (22 against shaft by spring, fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the foam ring of Kumagai to have a dust lip as in Downes with a reasonable expectation of success so that the dust lip prevents entry of dust or debris to the seal assembly.
PNG
media_image1.png
819
861
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to L. SUSMITHA KONERU whose telephone number is (571) 270-5333. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 9 A.M. – 4 P.M.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Christine Mills can be reached on 571.272.8322. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/L.S.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights